Context of the Board of Prosecutors
Number 4 Fortuny Street in Madrid will be a pressure cooker this Tuesday, or even a battlefield for judges. The meeting of the Public Prosecutors is to establish the criteria of the body, the position that will be defended before the courts that have to decide, on the application of the amnesty in the crimes of embezzlement. A decision that fully affects a good number of those convicted and prosecuted by the Trial, such as Oriol Junqueras, Raül Romeva, Jordi Turull, Dolors Bassa, Carles Puigdemont, Toni Comín and Lluís Puig, as well as the defendants in the main case of the Trial of the Court of Instruction 13 of Barcelona, which also has a referral to the High Court of Justice of Catalonia.
Summons and challenge of prosecutors
The conclave was convened by the State Attorney General, Álvaro García Ortiz, after the four prosecutors of the Process trial – Javier Zaragoza, Fidel Cadena, Consuelo Madrigal and Jaime Moreno – challenged him, stating that the crime of embezzlement could not be amnestied. These four prosecutors apply an extravagant theory of unjust enrichment and allege a virtual harm to the economic interests of the European Union. The 38 members of the fiscal leadership will have to debate what thesis they defend, following an established protocol. Now, whatever its final position is, it will not be binding, because the criteria of the attorney general will end up being imposed, which perfectly grants amnesty to embezzlement in cases related to the Process that the Prosecutor’s Office has analyzed.
Tension and expectations
The tension of recent weeks, with contrary reports and decrees, has raised the price of a Board of Prosecutors that could further unleash the internal war within the Prosecutor’s Office.
Development of the meeting
The meeting will begin at nine-thirty in the morning and is expected to be “long.” In fact, article 27 of the Organic Statute of the Prosecutor’s Office will apply. This article orders that if a prosecutor receives an order from his superiors that he considers contrary to the law or that he believes to be inadmissible, he will submit a reasoned report to his boss, and if he considers that his proposals have not been addressed, he will present the issue to the Board of Prosecutors. Therefore, it was invoked by the four prosecutors and accepted by the attorney general.
Thus, following this article, the 38 prosecutors – 37 plus the attorney general – can intervene in the meeting, without a time limit and in reverse order of appointment, from newest to oldest. The debate has to end with the vote that is expected to be “very close.” If García Ortiz does not obtain a majority, he may end up imposing his criteria. Sources from the Prosecutor’s Office indicate that the criterion once the Meeting is over but before adjourning the session. That is to say, he will not wait to exhaust the deadline given to him by the criminal chamber of the Supreme Court, which ends tomorrow.
Possible scenario and consequences
According to what is established in article 27, in the case of imposing his criteria, García Ortiz will have to present a reasoned writing to expressly exempt the four prosecutors of the Supreme Court from the responsibilities that may arise from compliance with his order. He will also sign, as attorney general, directly, the document requesting the application of the amnesty, and will foreseeably apply the last power that article 27 allows him and – as the four prosecutors of the Supreme Court have asked him – he will remove them from the case and will commission the defense of the position to other prosecutors, who agree with their criteria.